Should we respectfully leave the Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Avocadomom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hoosier_Daddy said:
Yet this is the position of the Church. This is the medicine needed to bring one back in. IF the OPs question is should I stay if I do not believe. Then the answer is no. IF it is “I am weak, should I stay and go to Mass and pray to be led in the right direction” Then the answer is Yes! Yes! a thousand times Yes.
Click to expand...
I am going to have to disagree with you again, HoosierDaddy. We are doing that a lot lately. :o

If a person is in the position of asking if they should “respectfully leave”, they are already feeling like they have no place because their doubts or their struggles are causing them to despair. They are about to commit spiritual suicide. Now if a person was about to commit physical suicide, you wouldn’t just say “you have already done it in your heart, so jump and don’t come back until you can fly” (exaggerated analogy, I know, but bear with me here, please) No, you would approach gently and counsel them calmly and talk them off that ledge! Same thing here.
Struggling with private dissent may or may not be mortal sin. But skipping Mass certainly is! Even if she wasn’t experiencing spiritual death before missing Mass, deciding not to go any longer because she can’t bring herself to believe right now will lead her directly to spiritual death.
And anyone who counsels another into committing mortal sin may be culpable for that. That is why we must never tell someone to leave the Church. We are partially responsible if they take our bad advice and walk away. Jesus wants us to help Him to find his lost little lambs and carry them home, not shut the gates and stand calmly on the other side while they suffer.

Only one’s bishop has the ability to do a formal excommunication. They don’t do so for reasons of personal private struggles with moral teachings. There are also sins that incur an automatic excommunication. Abortion is one, but as far as I know, sterilization and private dissent do not. Furthermore, someone who has incurred automatic excommunication is not prohibited from attending Mass, but from receiving the Eucharist. So, we have to be really careful to properly represent excommunication and with how we speak about leaving the Church. It is not our place to close the gates.
 
NFPWife said:
I’ll add to the statement that she is not culpable, that should her husband used some form of ABC, she is not obligated to refuse marital relations.
Click to expand...
Accurate, but that’s in a case where the wife already expressed her objections but he refuses. Same where a husband continues to have relations with a wife using contraception over his objections. It’s not a loophole. Again, God isn’t up there checking lists and reading over the fine print.
 
marywarfield said:
I have a couple suggestions for you. You and the
others do not make your case by paraphrasing your
interpretations of what I say.
You would do better with actual truthful quotes.

At NO TIME did I tell the OP she was pathetic.

Never happened.

I am curious though why you wish to present
me as having done so? Does this tendency
back your argument in some way?
Click to expand...
Post number 208
And pathetic. If people want to leave they could
have the decency as adults to take the responsibility
on themselves instead of claiming they are being forced out.
That’s absurd.
Click to expand...
Yes I paraphrased you, I wasn’t about to quote all of your posts…but everything I said you had said…married for 30years, you had abstained, pathetic etc…
 
shelby_sun said:
DO NOT include me in saying that the Church’s teaching is wrong, as I have never said that. I will being putting in a formal complaint after this because I know you cannot find that in any of my post and your are crossing the line her by saying that is my position. Go back and find where I have said that anywhere. You are very out of line here and I will not sit back and lie. Go ahead, find it.
Click to expand...
Again, a misunderstanding. I do not fully grasp your position it is true, but your intense support of the OPs position and she herself has admitted that she and her husband don’t believe the Church is right on contraception… gives you a position that is the opposite of mine. Your position and the OPs position are different to the one I am putting forth in defense of the Church and that was what I was saying.

Lets clear it up and move on. Do you fully support the Church teaching regarding contraception as laid out in Humanae Vitae and elsewhere in Church teaching?
 
The_Bucket said:
Artful indeed, making it about the OP.

Plausible deniability that you were speaking about someone else. And maybe you were. I’ll assume you were. But the rhetoric and tone is there in the mirror being held up by our Protestant friend.
Click to expand...
Thank you for finding the post, The Bucket. You saved me a lot of time. I was going to hunt it down, just like I had for the other post by the same poster, which said the OP should leave.
 
Lots of self righteousness (what else is new here or elsewhere?!) around. Look, I am all for a vigorous defense of the Truth. I’m always of the mind when thinking “What Would Jesus Do?” that there is always the option of flipping out, knocking over tables and making a sweet whip.

But perhaps think of this before posting: Are you more concerned about saving souls or making yourself feel good that you stood up to someone on the Internet?
 
mommamaree said:
No no no. This is a horrible thing to say.

A person who commits a mortal sin does not “leave” the Church. They must only refrain from communion, but they are never told to therefore stop going to Mass until they experience genuine contrition. They continue going to Mass, but go to confession before receiving the Eucharist.

A person who struggles with a moral teaching of the Church does not “leave” the Church. They are still obligated and invited to attend Mass every Sunday and holy day, and they are invited to seek pastoral counsel and they have recourse to confession. Depending on the level of their internal struggles, they may or may not need to refrain from Communion. For example, if they doubt, but remain obedient, they need not refrain. If they doubt, and act contrary to teachings, they should refrain. Their priest can help them figure this out.

We should never ever ever tell someone to leave because of some notion that, due to their dissent, they have already “left”. Please reconsider this idea. I am afraid it is very harmful, and not just to others. But you are setting yourself up for a terrible crises if you think a person must leave the Church formally because they have already left in their hearts.
Click to expand...
It is not horrible. It is Catholic. Calling it horrible may be a reaction to how this thread has taken a turn so now we all label everyone’s posts demonic or such.😉

See if you can follow this.

The Church is not just the people sitting next to you in the pews. The Church is made up of the Saints who have gone before. And Angels who are in heaven and guide us. Each one of us has their own. And the Church “Triumphant” is the communion of saints. (including hopefully, us)

It is quite simple. So simple in fact that I am going to use first grade theology curriculum from Seton.

Original sin “closed the gates of heaven”
Jesus Christ open those gates for us as our savior.
Baptism cleanses original sin, it makes us part of the “Church” It is salvific and cleanses ALL sin Original and Actual from the soul.

There are two types of Actual Sin. Venial and Mortal.

Venial sin displeases God but does not rob our souls of His Grace.
Mortal sin is a very serious sin. Mortal sin Makes us “enemies” of God and robs our soul of His Grace. Anyone who dies in Mortal Sin cannot go to heaven.

That is from Week 24 of Seton’s Curriculum which is approved by the Church.

Now here is where we go beyond first grade chatechism and where I say the semantics are involved. There
Are four kinds of “Church” in the Universal Church. (universal meaning “Catholic” )

Church Militant: Those living on earth and in good graces in the Church.
Church Triumphant: Those in heaven, and ultimately the entirety of the Church.
Church Penitent: Those suffering
Church expectant Those in purgatory. (note, the expectant part is that they WILL get to heaven. They are being cleansed from venial sin and temporal punishments for confessed and forgiven mortal sin.)

No one in mortal sin is part of any 4 parts of the Church. They place themselves as “enemies” of God (see above) and so therefore certainly are not part of the Body of Christ.

So when one is in mortal sin, one has chosen to “leave” the Church. plain and simple.

Nancy Pelosi not withstanding.

If that is “horrible” then don’t blame me, blame the one responsible for the banishment.
 
LongingSoul said:
No, marywarfield is not talking about people who struggle with the principle and refrain from communion…

She is addressing the mentality that simply believes the Church is wrong on this point and happily reject it. You have come to the conversation late and are not realising the position of the OP and Shelbysun.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I have no intention of locking people
in place.
If you look back to the beginning of the thread I suggested
she attend Mass and refrain from the Eucharist until she
resolved this. I was promptly jumped on and told I was
arrogant and heartless.

Later when the OP questioned why she shouldn’t just
be a happy joyful Protestant I said maybe she should
leave the Church yes.

If people WANT to go you can’t stop them by
agreeing the Church is wrong, priests are stupid,
teaching is old fashioned.
And I’m my earlier post I pointed out the fallacy
of telling people to always follow their priest’s
opinion.
No they should not. All priests are not created equal.
What she needs to do is read and understand the
CATECHISM. And pray.
The catechism does not change its mind. Ever. It also
doesn’t change it’s teaching from parish to parish.
 
marywarfield said:
No they should not. All priests are not created equal.
What she needs to do is read and understand the
CATECHISM. And pray.
The catechism does not change its mind. Ever. It also
doesn’t change it’s teaching from parish to parish.
Click to expand...
I thought the catechism contained disciplines and doctrine and disciplines can change?
 
The_Bucket said:
Artful indeed, making it about the OP.

Plausible deniability that you were speaking about someone else. And maybe you were. I’ll assume you were. But the rhetoric and tone is there in the mirror being held up by our Protestant friend.
Click to expand...
Ok I reflected. I’m still good with it and will leave
it.
 
The_Bucket said:
Accurate, but that’s in a case where the wife already expressed her objections but he refuses. Same where a husband continues to have relations with a wife using contraception over his objections. It’s not a loophole. Again, God isn’t up there checking lists and reading over the fine print.
Click to expand...
Thanks for adding that clarification, in the section I quoted I thought it made the basis that the OP was at a place where she wasn’t desiring the ABC and had voiced concerns/ objections.
 
Hoosier Daddy,
You know I also teach catechism, so this is not news to me.

What I object to is telling someone NOT TO COME BACK to Church (as in Mass, in the Church building) whether because they are in a state of sin or because they dissent.

Off topic aside: By the way, I have never seen four listed. My materials: Faith and Life series and the St. Joseph catechism all say three: Church Militant, Church Suffering, Church Triumphant. So where did you find four?

Would you tell a young man who committed a sin against purity not to come back to Mass until he could muster enough contrition to go to confession first? Or would you simply advise refraining from the Eucharist? I think I know which you would suggest.

So, why would you tell a woman who is struggling with dissent over a moral teaching, who has not yet acted contrary to Church teaching, but is instead seeking counsel and help from Catholic friends and here at CAF, that she has already left in her heart so she should formally leave? I doubt you really would, would you? I hope not. I hope you would advise her to continue seeking counsel, continue in prayer, remain obedient even though it is hard, have recourse to confession, but most of all, keep attending Mass, and perhaps even have as her private Mass intention that the Holy Spirit would guide her husband and her in this difficult trial.
 
mommamaree said:
I am going to have to disagree with you again, HoosierDaddy. We are doing that a lot lately. :o

If a person is in the position of asking if they should “respectfully leave”, they are already feeling like they have no place because their doubts or their struggles are causing them to despair. They are about to commit spiritual suicide. Now if a person was about to commit physical suicide, you wouldn’t just say “you have already done it in your heart, so jump and don’t come back until you can fly” (exaggerated analogy, I know, but bear with me here, please) No, you would approach gently and counsel them calmly and talk them off that ledge! Same thing here.
Struggling with private dissent may or may not be mortal sin. But skipping Mass certainly is! Even if she wasn’t experiencing spiritual death before missing Mass, deciding not to go any longer because she can’t bring herself to believe right now will lead her directly to spiritual death.
And anyone who counsels another into committing mortal sin may be culpable for that. That is why we must never tell someone to leave the Church. We are partially responsible if they take our bad advice and walk away. Jesus wants us to help Him to find his lost little lambs and carry them home, not shut the gates and stand calmly on the other side while they suffer.

Only one’s bishop has the ability to do a formal excommunication. They don’t do so for reasons of personal private struggles with moral teachings. There are also sins that incur an automatic excommunication. Abortion is one, but as far as I know, sterilization and private dissent do not. Furthermore, someone who has incurred automatic excommunication is not prohibited from attending Mass, but from receiving the Eucharist. So, we have to be really careful to properly represent excommunication and with how we speak about leaving the Church. It is not our place to close the gates.
Click to expand...
Excommunication is a medicine used by the Church it is an ecclesiastical tool. It also has no real bearing on salvation. Joan of Arc was excommunicated. It is when the Church says (usually for the betterment of public opinion) that you are anathema. Some excommunications are automatic (abortion) and some are a lengthy and judicial process. (SSPX)

But excommunication is by no means the only or even the largest way that someone is outside of the Church.

See my previous post.
If you can show me where one is in mortal sin that they are members of the Universal Church. then go ahead. I will say that mortal sin robbing your soul of ALL of God’s graces will be a hard argument to overcome.
 
marywarfield said:
Actually lol let me use the OPs and Shelby’s reasoning
for this statement ok? Same thing.

When I was 15 I told my priest that I could not
understand the Church not letting women in these
days if overpopulation use birth control or have
abortions. This was very confusing to me as it
was not loving.

My priest’s answer: the Church has spoken on
this issue. You need to leave the Church until
you can accept it’s authority to do so.

So now- who is correct here? Should I listen to
you? The Church? Or the priest?

After all both the OP and Shelby say we need
to follow the priest because at 75 her priest has more
experience.
Well mine was 79. And old. And celibate. Putting
forth the same anachronistic ideas.

So now what? They have an old priest that says yes to
vasectomy birth control and Communion.
I have an old priest who says no in no uncertain
terms.
I’m quite sure you all will claim mine was:
mean, arrogant, pompous, uncharitable,
manipulative, and everything else I’ve been
accused of.

However let me point out that 43 years later I’m
still here not enjoying the company of joyful,
birth control using, happy on fire with Christ’s love
Protestants.
Click to expand...
Since you still feel the need to mention me and make me out to be something I am not I will continue to respond.

LOL No I would fully expect your priest to say just what he said, in line with the Church’s teaching. But thank you for you assumption, you are good at those also. Like I said before, which I am sure you will not believe I did not seek out numerous priest until I found one to said what I wanted to hear.

Good for you that you are still apart of the Church, but you are still a sinner, as are all the rest of us on this site.
 
Truth_Faith13 said:
Post number 208

Yes I paraphrased you, I wasn’t about to quote all of your posts…but everything I said you had said…married for 30years, you had abstained, pathetic etc…
Click to expand...
Well isn’t that convenient? And you decided my post
was only aimed at the OP even though you couldn’t
take the time to read the conversations with other
posters as well?
Hmmm.
I ask you again- your distortional summary of my tons
of posts on this thread narrowed down bu you to three
sentences- did it achieve your goal?

And the claim I told avacadomom she was pathetic-
Something that never happened either- how did that
work for you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top